imyurhukaberry wrote:
The main difference between the two is your tiered system NEVER allows a loss in one game to be higher than a win in another game.
Where as by straight points, a loss in one game CAN be higher than a win in another game. Which sounds perfect right?
Yeah I definitely think that when we are talking about a single game, a win should always be more than a loss.
I think having a simple tier system is best, and most likely be accepted by the community. I've learned that anything that looks complex, has a VERY hard hill to climb to be adopted in the community.
This is why I think simple 5-3-1 is best. Literally nothing in our system needs to change expect a 2 is now a 3, and a 3 is now a 5.
This will cover a lot of other issues as well. Same record but one has less finished games and one has more? The one with more finished games will be ahead in all but the most extreme situations.
It doesn't take away motivation for 1pt losses, it's still very important. But it does RAISE the motivation to
finish games, and prizes
wins in a finished game above all, and makes it more difficult to get under 200pt wins and simply "make up for it" with a 1pt loss.
A straight points scored system leaves possibility for WILD swings. In theory, a player could finish first and only win a single game. That is far too extreme.
So, yes - there are some similarities in our methods, and I think some of our views certainly align. However I think we will have a hard enough road getting a more sensible system in place at all, and we'll only really have a shot if it is very simple and requires very little change.